Three Steps to Heaven: Semantic Publishing in a Real World Workflow by Phillip Lord, Simon Cockell, and Robert Stevens.
Abstract:
Semantic publishing offers the promise of computable papers, enriched visualisation and a realisation of the linked data ideal. In reality, however, the publication process contrives to prevent richer semantics while culminating in a `lumpen’ PDF. In this paper, we discuss a web-first approach to publication, and describe a three-tiered approach which integrates with the existing authoring tooling. Critically, although it adds limited semantics, it does provide value to all the participants in the process: the author, the reader and the machine.
With a touch of irony and gloom the authors write:
… There are signi cant barriers to the acceptance of semantic publishing as a standard mechanism for academic publishing. The web was invented around 1990 as a light-weight mechanism for publication of documents. It has subsequently had a massive impact on society in general. It has, however, barely touched most scientifi c publishing; while most journals have a website, the publication process still revolves around the generation of papers, moving from Microsoft Word or LATEX [5], through to a final PDF which looks, feels and is something designed to be printed onto paper4. Adding semantics into this environment is difficult or impossible; the content of the PDF has to be exposed and semantic content retrofi tted or, in all likelihood, a complex process of author and publisher interaction has to be devised and followed. If semantic data publishing and semantic publishing of academic narratives are to work together, then academic publishing needs to change.
4. This includes conferences dedicated to the web and the use of web technologies.
One could add “…includes papers about changing the publishing process” but I digress.
I don’t disagree that adding semantics to the current system has proved problematic.
I do disagree that changing the current system, which is deeply embedded in research, publishing and social practices is likely to succeed.
At least if success is defined as a general solution to adding semantics to scientific research and publishing in general. Such projects may be successful in creating new methods of publishing scientific research but that just expands the variety of methods we must account for.
That doesn’t have a “solution like” feel to me. You?